There is a major flaw in the United States Constitution. The Founders understood
that partisan politics would inevitably result in bickering along party lines
that would lead to charges that political opponents were betraying the country
so they deliberately made it very difficult to charge others with "treason."
Which is not to say that they did not regard treason as the most heinous of
crimes. The fact that it is defined in the Constitution, one of only two crimes
to be specified in the document, is telling, but they just wanted to make sure
that when the charge was made it was made in all seriously, not to obtain frivolous
political advantage. In Article III the Constitution states
"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against
them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person
shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the
same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court."

Because of the high bar set by the Constitution, treason convictions in the
United States have been relatively
few, normally occurring during declared wars. The last such conviction was
in 1952. Elsewhere in the world, treason trials, if not common, occur when someone
is believed to have collaborated with an actual declared enemy or to have subverted
a country’s laws or constitution, to include attempting to overthrow an established
government. Avoiding legal complexities, the Merriam Webster unabridged dictionary
provides a broad
primary definition for the word treason, describing it as "the betrayal
of a trust."

The problem with the treason definition applicable in the United States is
that it does not cover what we are seeing right now, something that the Founders
could never have anticipated. I am referring to a concerted "betrayal of
trust" by a group of American government elected officials in openly advancing
policies that serve the interests of a foreign country, specifically the senators
and congressmen who are lining up behind Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
to oppose the White House’s attempt to negotiate an equitable solution to the
thirty-five year confrontation with Iran. The discussion in Washington is now
focused on possibly baseless allegations that Iran is seeking to acquire a nuclear
weapon, but it is really all about Iranian military and economic power as it
relates to the state of Israel. The dissident legislators include nearly all
Republicans as well as many
leading Democrats who have long been advocates for Israel. Their intention
is to throw a spanner into the works by seeking to pass new sanctions legislation
which, the Iranians have already warned, will end any possibility for a deal.

Neocon Noam Neusner recently
provided an insight into what is going on in Congress, boasting that "Normally
a party’s leadership will stand behind a president in his moment of diplomatic
achievement. Not this time." He further explains that the "conspicuous
silence" among Democrats is because they are "the men and the women,
after all, who are on a first name basis with most of the board of AIPAC"
and "they want to be in Washington long after Obama leaves the White House."
And lest there be any confusion about what AIPAC and the rest of the Lobby want,
Abe Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League has offered
his own critique, saying that he is "embarrassed by our government’s acceptance
of Iran’s blackmail," calling secret talks with Iran "a violation
of the special relationship with Israel."

The pressure has been so intense that President Barack Obama had to personally
go to a gathering of a major component of the Israel Lobby – the Brookings Saban
Center – to explain
to Israeli-American billionaire Haim Saban and a hostile audience what he intends
to do about Iran. His explanation eventually expanded to include a complete
sellout of the Palestinians, avoiding the subject of settlements, calling Israel
a "Jewish state," and conceding that Tel Aviv has a right to call
all the shots on its security demands. Secretary of State John Kerry has
called Israeli Arabs a "demographic time bomb" so security presumably
includes possible ethnic cleansing. Obama should have been embarrassed to subsequently
attend the Mandela funeral, where he was observed laughing and grinning with
other heads of state. Apparently everyone appreciates a good joke.

Congress meanwhile has been doing its part, disputing each and every White
House justification for the negotiations, possibly inducing the Administration
to respond by adding
a number of Iranian trading partners to the list of organizations already subject
to sanctions, leading to a temporary suspension of the talks in Geneva. The
White House is now schizophrenically arguing
that new sanctions are okay as long as they are not directed at the nuclear
program, a ridiculous claim that Tehran is not buying into.

And the consequences of all the bickering are deadly serious, with many observers
nervously noting
that the only alternative to talks is war because the United States and Israel
have excluded all other options. And a war would have major consequences not
only for Iran but also for the United States. Energy prices would skyrocket,
there would undoubtedly be a new wave of international terrorism directed against
the United States and American citizens, and Iran has significant capabilities
to strike back directly against US forces.

Closing the door on talks also eliminates the possibility of any positive
engagement with Iran. The White House claims to be inexorably opposed to
Salafist terrorist organizations, to include al-Qaeda and its various franchises.
Iran also opposes those groups as many of them believe in killing Shi’ite Muslims,
the majority religious group in Iran. Tehran most likely has better intelligence
on al-Qaeda than does Washington and might be willing to share it, but the congressmen,
benefiting their own ambitions and little more, are clearly not heedful of the
grave damage they are doing to the United States and its interests overseas.
Preaching war with Iran is serious business, not the usual Capitol Hill game
of one-upmanship akin to a victimless crime where what does and does not take
place has little or no meaning.

Some might argue that the congressmen are within their rights, that they are
expressing their legitimate concerns that Iran is being deceptive, enabling
talks to go on while they creep closer and closer to their objective of weaponizing
their uranium stockpile. There just might be a congressman or two who actually
believes that or who genuinely thinks that Iran poses some kind of threat to
the United States, but it does not require any particular insight to realize
that the opposition to talks with Iran overwhelmingly comes directly from Israel
and its friends and from nobody else. The principal Israeli lobby AIPAC has
basically declared
war on the White House over the issue and the Senators who are leading the
charge are firmly in Israel’s pocket. Senator Mark Kirk of Illinois is even
being briefed
by Israeli intelligence and Israeli cabinet ministers have been observed
pleading their case on Capitol Hill to a very receptive audience. Several congressmen
have angrily confronted Secretary of State Kerry when he was trying to explain
the tentative agreement with Iran, citing information they received from the
Israeli Embassy and even quoting the Israeli media.

Our first president George Washington was aware of the danger of too "passionate
attachments" to any foreign country, warning in his Farewell
Address that "The Nation, which indulges towards another an habitual
hatred, or an habitual fondness, is in some degree a slave.” Though the Quislings
in Congress cannot, unfortunately, be found guilty of treason, there is, of
course, the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) of 1938, which requires
individuals acting on behalf of a foreign country to register with the Justice
Department and to reveal their sources of funds. While it would be quite a spectacle
to see lines of congressmen registering, no one should actually expect the Obama
Administration to make such a demand or attempt to enforce it. The last president
who sought registration
of an Israel lobbyist as a foreign agent was John F. Kennedy, who attempted
to force the predecessor to AIPAC, then called the American Zionist Council,
to comply with the law.

All of the above means that between a charge of treason and the requirement
to register as a foreign agent, ignored anyway in the case of Israel, there
is no middle ground to punish congressmen who act on behalf of a foreign government
apart from impeachment. Impeachment
of a congressmen for any "high crime and misdemeanor" requires charges
being initiated in the House of Representatives followed by the trial in the
Senate. The somewhat tedious and no doubt heavily politicized procedure is unfortunate
as impeachment therefore actually needs someone willing to stand up on his or
her hind feet and demand that our legislators do something to benefit the folks
who elect them rather than respond to those who pay for their extracurricular
services on behalf of a foreign power. That someone would be very difficult
to find.

Unfortunately, at this point, it wouldn't matter how "treason" was defined, because in a lawless banana republic such as this one, it is still nothing more than "words on paper", and "words on paper" mean absolutely nothing.

Johnny in Wi.

I have never expected the talks to be successful no matter how much the Iranian government concedes. 60% of funding for the Democrat Party comes from sources that back Israel. Most of the party and the rest of the country, as well, wants peace. The money people want something else. In the end Obama will cave just like Bush Sr. and Clinton did when faced with the all powerful Lobby out in full force. Frankly I don't see how we get this gang off our back before they ruin us once and for all?

jeff_davis

"Frankly I don't see how we get this gang off our back before they ruin us once and for all?"

"Before they ruin us"? There's the rub. Not gonna happen. Five thousand years of the same thing. The Jews go somewhere, do well, then do very well, then take over, then "ruin" the locals — which is to say reduce them to second class citizens in what was once THEIR country. Egypt 3500 years ago, the US today.

It's after they ruin an entire country, an entire people, that the corrective "pushback" comes: chased out of Egypt, chased out of ancient Israel, chased out of Spain/Portugal, exterminated by the N*zis.

Now, on behalf of Israel, the American Jewish community is being hoodwinked into betraying the country that gave them complete religious and commercial freedom without a hint of persecution. On the basis of ancient tribal loyalty, the American Jewish community is being hoodwinked into bankrolling this betrayal, based on catastrophically misguided tribal "loyalty" and the inherently treacherous "mythology" of Israel as the promised land.

When America has been immiserated, its military used up and treasury looted, reduced to an empty husk in the name of capitalist profits and Israeli security, everything of value stripped away, prosperity exclusively for the elite and misery for everyone else, …

When — absent some intervention — that point is reached, Americans will look around for someone to blame, and there will be the Jews, substantially, though not wholly, to blame. And then. as across the last five-thousand years, they will have, yet again, built their next holocaust, or as I put it, completed the latest chapter in their historic quest for "suicide-by-goy".

Sad. Monstrously sad. Got all A's in school, flunked life.

Clarence

There's so much idiocy and misinformation in your ugly post, it would take far too long to refute it in depth. Generally speaking, what you've done is spitefully distorted and oversimplified thousands of years of complicated history, and shamefully acquitted multitudes of torturers and murderers, utterly excusing their theological craziness, their perpetuation of ghettoes, their evil game of guilt by association, their penchant for barbaric cruelty, and their knee jerk tendency to scapegoat a captive minority during bad times (such as during the Plague; pray tell, what devilish role did the captive minority play in that?). I suppose the ultimate insult is claiming that this minority deserved its recent near-extermination. What did some poor adolescent in a shtetl somewhere do to harm the Reich?

Since you speak like a member of Stormfront, do you also believe that African Americans deserved their enslavement? I'm just wondering if your fear of the mob is so deep that you would justify that too.

RickR30

"oversimplified thousands of years of complicated history, and shamefully acquitted multitudes of torturers and murderers, utterly excusing their theological craziness, their perpetuation of ghettoes, their evil game of guilt by association, their penchant for barbaric cruelty, and their knee jerk tendency to scapegoat a captive minority during bad times"

Kinda like what the zionists and their acolytes in the media do, huh?

Clarence

Aren't you the same guy who criticized me on another thread for changing the subject as a dodge?

I'm sure YOU'D never do such a thing in a million years, right? ;-)

I'm truly sailing on a ship of fools…

jane

You've unwittenly described the apartheid situation in Israel to a tee.

jane

sp "unwittingly"

Clarence

I don't post anything unwittingly. I've been trading these blows long enough to expect the predictable anti-Israel crowd to boomerang any and every charge made against Israel's enemies. The neat and tidy parallelism you think you've spotted doesn't exist.

RickR30

A shame you don't see it, it's not that hard. Except that when applied to "israel's enemies" it's mostly fiction, while israel's actions are there for anyone to see who isn't blinded by…religion? tribal mentality? self-righteousness? alleged superiority?

Clarence

You're always quick to criticize a pro-Israel commenter. But where are you and the other self-righteous moralists when Israelis are lumped together and called things like "subhuman garbage" by your fellow posters, like "Liberty Rising"? Where are you then?

Hiding in the dark, silently nodding in agreement.

You severe critics of Israel ought to be judged just as much by what you choose NOT to say when you clearly should. Folks like you make your arguments, and then sit back and let the flame throwers do their thing. As long as they're spewing vulgarities at your enemies, you suspend judgment and reserve your sanctimonious lectures only for one side. You cry "racism" all the time but you don't have the stones to call out the virulent racists playing on your own team. (Or maybe you are one too.) Just go along and get along. How brave.

And how childish to deliberately not capitalize the word Israel. How old are you, anyway?

RickR30

You're too quick to personalize things and assume all sorts of things about others and lump everyone in the same bag.

I don't read all comments and have no interest in defending the defenders of israel, just as you don't have any interest on defending the critics of israel.

Critics of israel criticize israel's actions. In turn, you want to judge others on what they say AND now on what they don't say? It would be much more refreshing for defenders of israel to take a hard objective look at the actions of israel's government and then freely and without prejudices declare whether they think those actions are in line with their own morality, with their religion, with their sense of humanity, and if they think those action are for the long term benefit of israel.

Clarence

Ah yes, the "I don't read all comments" defence! Nice try.

Like I said, you moralize self-righteously about one very specific variety of racism while hypocritically tolerating, and tacitly encouraging, the most brazen, vulgar, and familiar species of racism there is. And that bigotry is contained in practically every second post here, so spare me your BS about how you somehow don't notice it! What a joke.

The point stands, no matter how hard you try to change the subject.

RickR30

I'm glad you finally admit "one very specific variety of racism." We can agree on something after all.

Clarence

I already alluded to racism in Israel. I used the word "prejudice". So hopefully we can also agree that you read what you want to read, and that you're keen to weasel away from my points.

Werner

The only untrue thing in jeff_davis's post was that NS Germany "exterminated" J-ws. Otherwise a good post.

Clarence

Just so everyone knows, this predictable, Holocaust-denying endorsement came from someone who said of the ethnic minority in question: "They don't call them nation-wreckers for nothing".

Congratulations, Davis. You're being endorsed by the same ilk who did the deed.

Margaret

You're simply mad because once again we are on to your tactics and lies and that infuriates the manipulators and evil doers you defend so passionately yet without one single FACT.

Clarence

Of course I've used facts. You just close your eyes to them. I mentioned the Balfour Declaration, the Sykes Picot agreement, the San Remo conference, and now I'll add the fact that the UN voted to recognize the state of Israel. International agreements don't seem to mean anything to hate-mongers who deny Israel's right to exist.

Phil, the stranglehold that Israel and their powerful friends here have on our nation is becoming more bazarre and frightening by the day. Very soon we could be marching to yet another proxy war in the middle east against a nation that poses no threat to us or any of its neighbors – despite Israel's hysteria and lies to the contrary. Our blood and money will be shed and many innocents will die. We have no recourse through our bribed and blackmailed elected officials who haven't the stones to defy the Lobby and put American interests first. We really are living in Israeli occupied territory and Americans should be very alarmed.

rosemerry

In a rational world, this situation, where a tiny entity which illegally occupies land and expands whenever it can and destroys the Palestinians whose home it is,controls the "reps" in a superpower, to the detriment of the citizens and even of the country and many others across the planet, could not happen.

As for treason defined as "someone is believed to have collaborated with an actual declared enemy ", this would these days include nearly anyone, since "declared enemies" leave few friends.

people with a normal IQ would understand that Mr.Ahmadinejad anti Semitism,and anti West "freedom "are poor drivels,he was not the hamper for any rational solution.The hope can come from US,a corrupted country in the style of the Ottoman Porte.A country where the corruption is legal,the lobbies are legal.The question is why other countries may follow the diktat of US corrupted system while is clear for everyone that US,the mythical embodying of the "capitalism and democracy" wonder,is only a bankrupted country ,why then not the sane world-if still exist a thing like this-doesn't oppose the idiocy of US and Israel demands,why not intellectuals from whole world don't denounce the farce if the common people were stultified in such measure that they are not able to see the reality.?

sherban

the hope can't come from US

Ben_C

"And the one thing I will say to the people of Israel is that you can be assured whoever is in the office I currently occupy, Democrat or Republican, that your security will be uppermost on our minds. That will not change. And that should not mean you let up on your vigilance in terms of wanting to look out for your own country. It does — it should give you some comfort, though, that you have the most powerful nation on Earth as your closest friend and ally. And that commitment is going to be undiminished."

"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort…"

From the above, it becomes obvious that Abe Lincoln was guilty of high treason. Yet most Americans today accept without question the Abe Lincoln myth which places him on the level of a demi-god who freed the slaves and preserved the Union. Like so many of today's writers and political commentators, Mr. Giraldi makes many valid points, but is a little late in shutting the barn door when the horse got out more than 150 years ago.

Philippe

You're absolutely right.

If there will be anything left or anyone around to attend a constitutional convention to reanimate the United States out of the coming disintegration and probable ashes, the first order of business by the new "Founding Fathers" will have to be the restoration of the Republic, a republic of states having the absolute right to secede from that Republic by the vote of the citizens of that state. This would asssure, as much as is possible, that the states are supreme, there would not be any "Beltway" or supreme court and only one or two "federal departments". Lobbyists would be easier to control. Much, much smaller would be beautiful. Of course that would mean that the collective citizenry would have to drop the hubris to "rule the world", forget the propaganda now pervading us, and stick to the pursuit of happiness as provided in their own sovereign state.

outsider

That's the tragedy of Lincoln, that he did "preserve the union" no matter the costs. It's no surprise that the greatest mass murderer in US history (remember he killed Americans who wanted to leave the US peacefully) is now looked upon as our greatest president. Many of the Empire's problems today can still be laid at the foot of dishonest Abe.

It's interesting to note how few Jewish Senators are among the sponsors. No Boxer, Feinstein, Franken, Sanders. At this point, Zionist / US imperialism cannot be blamed entirely on the Jews. So back off, you anti-Semites out there.

carroll price

Since AIPAC writes virtually all the legislation of this nature and keeps most congressmen bribed and in constant fear of their jobs, the Jewish senators you mention do not need to openly support bills that benefit only Israel at the expense of everyone else. Zionist have a long history of preferring to work quietly behind the scenes when possible. Rather than run the risk of exposing themselves as the traitors they have always been.

eric siverson

If you think what you said is true all you need to do is elect new honest congressmen

Clarence

You're dreaming if you think they'll back off. One can easily anticipate their BS… They'll say that every Gentile sponsor of the bill is in AIPAC's pocket, and AIPAC is code for "American J-wry". Presto! That's how the same old scapegoat will be blamed, even though 99% of J-ws aren't politically active.

By the way, even if EVERY sponsor of the bill had been J-wish, it STILL wouldn't mean anything can be "blamed entirely on the J-ws." As I said, virtually all American J-ws (like the rest of the country) just go about their lives and have nothing to do with politics and government. A minority of millions can't reasonably be held accountable for the actions of a handful of people.

richard vajs

Clarence,
AIPAC is not code for anything – it is the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. It blatantly calls itself, "America's Israel Lobby", and the truth is that Israel calls itself a Jewish country. Every Jew can be a citizen of Israel, regardless of any other citizenship or loyalty. And non Jews cannot be full citizens of Israel. I am old enough to remember (before someone got the wise idea to get ALL American taxpayers to support Israel) when there were such things as Israeli Bond drives, in which any Jew who went to one of the dinners, got psychological browbeaten into coughing up lots of money to donate to Israel. So please stop trying to disassociate Israel from American Jews. If Israel is now a racist, land-stealing monster (which it is); then American Jews must be in the forefront to correct things.

eric siverson

I don't think a Christian Jew can of citizen of Israel so that shuts down your any other loyalty argument .

outsider

What's really distressing is that there are a large number of donkeys signing on, putting Israel ahead of the leader of their party. Here's what I don't get. Only a few months ago the American people spoke out forcefully against a strike on Syria. You would think, if the politicians are paying attention to the people's rejection of another war, that they would remember this and not turn around and sabotage such a fragile agreement, making war that much more likely. I've read that 60% support Obama's initiative. If true, why aren't they listening?

outsider

Many who post here frequently think that President Obama is Israel's puppet. I've never quite subscribed to it. If he was, why did nutcake Netanyahu basically campaign for Romney, who famously said that there would be no daylight between the two countries if he was elected. If Obama is in AIPAC's hip pocket, why would he have initiated this deal in the first place?

The ACA has blown up in Obama's face, which is now, I think, giving many Dems the courage to buck their leader. But maybe it's not too late for Obama to salvage this. I'd like to see him make a prime time speech laying out why we need to negotiate with Iran and avoid another disastrous war. He should forcefully spell out why the neocons and Israel-firsters are not acting in the best interest of the country. If he made such a speech, I think the people would support him. I wonder what Mr. Giraldi thinks?

jane

I am afraid that if Obama dared make such a speech, it would be his last. Israel and their neocon creatures here are not fooling around. They have wanted this war with Iran for decades and they're but a hair's breadth away from it. The Lobby has declared war on the Whitehouse over the Iran deal and they are determined to realise their dream. I think Obama knows his days would be numbered if he called the Lobby out so publicly. This country has been so screwed up by these monsters.

Clarence

You heard it here. Phil Giraldi hopes the war hero McCain burns in hell.

Well, at least Phil's able to keep his personal feelings out of it.

jane

The war hero? You really are showing your obtuseness or your ignorance – almost no one considers this demented coward a war hero. He's long been exposed as both a disgrace to the military and the senate. Educate yourself.

The real problem is that our members of congress do not represent the people who elected them, they represent their paymasters. It might be more realistic to think of Israel as a company rather than a country and AIPAC as a corporate lobbying machine.